This is the objective course of history. No one is to blame.
In Russia, whenever the question "who is to blame?" arises in any discussion, TV show, article or casual talk, it is immediately followed by the question "what is to be done?" (or, more authentically, "what to do?"). This is supposed to be good taste as these two questions are the exact names of the two cornerstone works of the Russian classic 19th century literature (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_to_Blame%3F,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_to_Be_Done%3F_(novel) ).
Cannot resist making a reference to G's piece on the matter, which is right on the spot.
https://youtu.be/IVYKFGGB2xY?list=PLRA8 ... rV7OloAU1PHe is discussing it in application to Russia, but it does not limit the generality of the argument. (It's in Russian, English auto-subtitles may be turned on, but the auto-translation is awful and it's quite a torture to read them.) Basically, he is saying that whoever has put forward these two questions together, made a great disservice to the country. Because once the question "who is to blame?" is raised, the answer to the question "what is to be done?" becomes crystal clear - namely, punish those who are to blame, detain them, kill them, imprison them, eliminate them. This is believed to immediately solve all our problems. And this predetermines the vicious circle of the Russian history, whereby those "who are to blame" are identified, dealt with, removed and eliminated, immediately followed by the question "who is to blame" being raised again, and so on and so forth.
He argues that out of these two questions the only one needs to be left, and this is not the question "who is to blame?". Primarily, because asking the question "who is to blame?" puts oneself into a position of a victim. Possibly, a rebelling victim who is ready to demolish everything on her way, but once everything is the demolished her position will be re-instated to the victim status yet again in the new circumstances, inevitably.
The question " what is to be done?" is absolutely different, that is, "what is to be done when no one is there to blame?". This question places a human being in a pro-active position towards the world.
The first step "to be done", is to stop asking question "who is to blame", and this would be a big leap forward. Because this the start of independent thinking, on what I, as a person, could do, specifically, in order to help myself, family, people, country, the world, whichever of those is within the reach of my abilities.